Overview While is largely assumed librarians are closely monitoring the needs of their constituencies as a part of the collection management decision-making process, the literature reflects only a small number of studies that focus on direct solicitation of user opinions. For this study, a 22-question survey sent to all faculty and graduate students in a cross-section of social science disciplines (anthropology, psychology, social work, and sociology) in Responses from 122 individuals (32.1 % of the faculty and 13.6% of the graduate students) provided data about book and journal use that have informed collection development priorities and reveal shifting patterns of use in an increasingly hybrid (print and electronic) information environment. The survey and its results targeting assessment of user needs can serve as a model for best practices in collection development for academic librarians interested in focusing on the needs of particular communities of scholars. Research Questions: What are the differences in book & journal use among disciplines? How do faculty and graduate students differ in their use of the collection? What are the prevailing collection access issues? Can this help us manage the continued shift from print to electronic format? Note the outliers, a few psychologists use far more books than the average. Book and Journal Use in Four Social Science Disciplines Allison Sutton & JoAnn Jacoby, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Use of Books & Journals for Teaching & By Discipline Boxplot of Number of Books Checked Out by Discipline Wide dispersion suggests use of books varies by subfield in anthropology. How Respondents Get Journal Articles in Relation to Perceived Importance of Library Collection Primary mode of access is electronic (M=4.3) for most respondents Personal subscriptions & reprints are less important than they were in Stenstrom and McBride’s (1979) study of social scientists at the same institution. Those who think the library is not important report infrequent use of its journal collection (A). But they often access journals online (C), likely using content licensed by the library. They are no more likely than others to rely on personal subscriptions (B). Books are important for teaching in all disciplines Journals are more important for research, especially in psychology which has science-oriented division, e.g., brain & cognition. In anthropology, it varies by subfield: cultural anthropologists  books biological anthropologists  journals archaeologists  both In anthropology, it varies by subfield: cultural anthropologists  books biological anthropologists  journals archaeologists  both EBSS Research Forum, American Library Association Annual Conference, June 23, 2007

Literature Cited Stenstrom, P. & R. McBride. (1979). Serial use by social science faculty: A survey. College and Research Libraries, 40(5): Acknowledgements The authors wish to acknowledge the Research and Publication Committee of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library, which provided support for the completion of this research. For Further Information Please contact Allison Sutton or JoAnn Jacoby The survey instrument is available online at: Collection Strengths in Respondent’s Research Area “Online journal collection is fantastic; this resource is almost invaluable to me.” “Women's studies; African Studies--but generally better for anglophone than francophone Africa.” “I generally can find everything that I need--if something isn't there, I just order it from another library…I've always been able to get references one way or another without too much trouble” Collection Weaknesses in Respondent’s Research Area “We have an extremely weak collection of foreign language and non-North American resources. “ “Journals published overseas.” “Our e-journal access for psychology at UIUC journals is substantially less than UIC.” “health services research journals.” “Although there are books that address parenting and pregnant teens, they were often checked out for extended periods of time or not on the shelf. Additional copies may allow for more productive use.” Book and Journal Use in Four Social Science Disciplines Allison Sutton & JoAnn Jacoby, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Further Study In another paper based on results from this survey not considered here, we will explore some additional questions of particular interest to subject specialists in the social sciences: What are the locally-defined core journals in each discipline?  Is there any overlap among the disciplines?  How dispersed is the core within each discipline?  Are there differences between faculty and graduate student core lists?  Do the survey-identified titles make and adequate core journal list for the Library? Why or why not? What importance do social science researchers attach to having materials by and about classic or contemporary theorists?  Is there any overlap among the disciplines?  Are there differences between faculty and graduate students? Conclusions Faculty and graduate students in all disciplines depend heavily on library collections and, in most cases, prefer to access materials online. The relative importance of books and journals varies among (and within) disciplines and in accordance with the task at hand. Books are heavily used for teaching in all four disciplines surveyed, while journals are generally more important for research, especially among the more science-oriented specializations within anthropology and psychology. Even within these two disciplines, however, there are a large number of scholars who rely heavily on books and monographs. While the local collection generally has the journals needed, respondents were less likely to find the books needed in the Library.  In many cases, the respondents indicated that access to these materials via interlibrary loan fulfills is sufficient. For high demand materials or those needed to support teaching, this was not acceptable. These findings have helped shape ongoing efforts to provide convenient access to the materials which are most useful to local researchers and resulted in a number of specific decisions: Accelerated shift from print to online for both journals and monographs Purchased SocINDEX Fulltext; Wiley psychology and neuroscience backfiles; Mental Measurements Yearbook online and are curretly negotiating for PsychiatryOnline More aggressive review of international titles that arrive via European approval plan; relocated select foreign language serials for more convenient access Became more actively involved in library initiatives to support health science research